Description:
Many millions of office workers are exposed to radon while at work and at home. Though there has been a multitude of studies reporting the measurements of radon concentrations and potential lung and effective doses associated with radon and progeny exposure in homes, similar studies on the concentrations and subsequent effective dose rates in the workplace are lacking. The purposes of this study were to measure radon concentrations in office and residential spaces in the same county and explore the radiation dose implications. Sixty-five track-etch detectors were deployed in office spaces and 47 were deployed in residences, all within Los Alamos County, New Mexico, USA. The sampling periods for these measurements were generally about three months. The measured concentrations were then used to calculate and compare effective dose rates resulting from exposure while at work and at home. Results showed that full-time office workers receive on average about nine times greater exposure at home than while in the office (691 mrem yr{sup -1} versus 78 mrem yr{sup -1}). The estimated effective dose rate for a more homebound person was 896 mrem yr{sup -1}. These effective dose rates are contrasted against the 100 mrem yr{sup -1} threshold for regulation of a 'radiological worker' defined in the Department of Energy regulations occupational exposure and the 10 mrem yr{sup -1} air pathway effective public dose limit regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Description:
Office workers are exposed to radon while at work and at home. Though there has been a multitude of studies reporting the measurements of radon concentrations and potential lung and effective doses associated with radon and progeny exposure in homes, similar studies on the concentrations and subsequent effective dose rates in the non-mine workplaces are lacking. Additionally, there are few, if any, comparative analyses of radon exposures at more 'typical' workplace with residential exposures within the same county. The purposes of this study were to measure radon concentrations in office and residential spaces in the same county and explore the radiation dose implications. Sixty-five track-etch detectors were deployed in office spaces and 47 were deployed in residences, all within Los Alamos County, New Mexico, USA. The sampling periods for these measurements were generally about three months. The measured concentrations were used to calculate and compare effective dose rates resulting from exposure while at work and at home. Results showed that full-time office workers receive on average about 8 times greater exposure at home than while in the office (2.3 mSv yr-! versus 0.3 mSv yr-!). The estimated effective dose rate for a more homebound person was about 3 mSv yr-!. Estimating effective doses from background radon exposure in the same county as Los Alamos National Laboratory, with thousands of'radiological workers,' highlights interesting contrasts in radiation protection standards that span public and occupational settings. For example, the effective dose rate from background radon exposure in unregulated office spaces ranged up to 1.1 mSv yr-!, which is similar to the 1 mSv yr-! threshold for regulation ofa 'radiological worker,' as defined in the Department of Energy regulations for occupational exposure. Additionally, the estimated average effective dose total of&gt; 3 mSv yf! from radon background exposure in homes stands in contrast to the ...

Description:
The purpose of this paper is to consider two general topics: technical considerations of why dose-reconstruction studies should or should not be performed and methods of dose reconstruction. The first topic is of general and growing interest as the number of dose-reconstruction studies increases, and one asks the question whether it is necessary to perform a dose reconstruction for virtually every site at which, for example, the Department of Energy (DOE) has operated a nuclear-related facility. And there is the broader question of how one might logically draw the line at performing or not performing dose-reconstruction (radiological and chemical) studies for virtually every industrial complex in the entire country. The second question is also of general interest. There is no single correct way to perform a dose-reconstruction study, and it is important not to follow blindly a single method to the point that cheaper, faster, more accurate, and more transparent methods might not be developed and applied.

Description:
The 2003 results for the Bettis-Pittsburgh radiological and nonradiological environmental monitoring programs are presented. The results demonstrate that the existing procedures ensured that releases to the environment during 2003 were in accordance with applicable Federal, State, County, and local regulations. Evaluation of the environmental data indicates that current operations at the Site continue to have no adverse effect on human health and the quality of the environment. A conservative assessment of radiation exposure to the general public as a result of Site operations demonstrates that the dose received by any member of the public was well below the most restrictive dose limits established by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the U.S. Department of Energy. A risk assessment of potentially exposed populations to chemical residues in the environment at the Site demonstrates that any potential risk posed by these residues in much less than the risks encountered in normal everyday life.

Description:
The Hanford Reach National Monument consists of several units, one of which is the Fitzner/Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve (ALE) Unit. This unit is approximately 311 km2 of shrub-steppe habitat located to the south and west of Highway 240. To fulfill internal U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements prior to any radiological clearance of land, DOE must evaluate the potential for residual radioactive contamination on this land and determine compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5400.5. Historical soil monitoring conducted on ALE indicated soil concentrations of radionuclides were well below the Authorized Limits. However, the historical sampling was done at a limited number of sampling locations. Therefore, additional soil sampling was conducted to determine if the concentrations of radionuclides in soil on the ALE Unit were below the Authorized Limits. This report contains the results of 50 additional soil samples. The 50 soil samples collected from the ALE Unit all had concentrations of radionuclides far below the Authorized Limits. The average concentrations for all detectable radionuclides were less than the estimated Hanford Site background. Furthermore, the maximum observed soil concentrations for the radionuclides included in the Authorized Limits would result in a potential annual dose of 0.14 mrem assuming the most probable use scenario, a recreational visitor. This potential dose is well below the DOE 100-mrem per year dose limit for a member of the public. Spatial analysis of the results indicated no observable statistically significant differences between radionuclide concentrations across the ALE Unit. Furthermore, the results of the biota dose assessment screen, which used the ResRad Biota code, indicated that the concentrations of radionuclides in ALE Unit soil pose no significant health risk to biota.

Description:
This Dose Assessment Guidance (DAG) describes methods to use to determine the Maximally-Exposed Individual (MEI) location and to estimate dose impact to that individual under the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Site Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP). This guidance applies to public dose from radioactive material releases to the air from PNNL Site operations. This document is an attachment to the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) and describes dose assessment guidance for radiological air emissions. The impact of radiological air emissions from the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) PNNL Site is indicated by dose estimates to a maximally exposed member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). Reporting requirements associated with dose to members of the public from radiological air emissions are in 40 CFR Part 61.94, WAC 246-247-080, and DOE Order 458.1. The DOE Order and state standards for dose from radioactive air emissions are consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) dose standards in 40 CFR 61.92 (i.e., 10 mrem/yr to a MEI). Despite the fact that the current Contract Requirements Document (CRD) for the DOE-SC PNNL Site operations does not include the requirement to meet DOE CRD 458.1, paragraph 2.b, public dose limits, the DOE dose limits would be met when EPA limits are met.

Description:
The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2010. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

Description:
The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2008. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

Description:
The emissions of radionuclides from Department of Energy Facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) are regulated by the Amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1990, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR 61 Subpart H). These regulations established an annual dose limit of 10 mrem to the maximally exposed member of the public attributable to emissions of radionuclides. This document describes the emissions of radionuclides from LANL and the dose calculations resulting from these emissions for calendar year 2009. This report meets the reporting requirements established in the regulations.

Description:
Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20 contains numerical data for controlling the intake of radionuclides in the workplace or in the environment. These data, derived from the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), do not provide a numerically consistent basis for demonstrating compliance with the limitation on dose stated in the regulation. This situation is largely a consequence of the numerical procedures used by the ICRP which did not maintain, in a strict numerical sense, the hierarchial relationship among the radiation protection quantities. In this work recommended values of the quantities in Appendix B to CFR Part 20 are developed using the dose coefficients of the applicable ICRP publications and a numerical procedure which ensures that the tabulated quantities are numerically consistent.

Description:
Effective on March 15, 1990, the Environmental Protection Agency established regulations controlling the emission of radionuclides to the air from Department of Energy facilities to limit the dose to the public to 10 mrem/yr. These regulations are detailed in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, {open_quotes}National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities{close_quotes}. Part of these regulations require the operation of sampling systems on stacks meeting certain requirements. Although Los Alamos National Laboratory has a long history of stack sampling, the systems in place at the time the regulation became effective did not meet the specific design requirements of the new regulation. In addition, certain specific program elements did not exist or were not adequately documented. The Los Alamos National Laboratory has undertaken a major effort to upgrade its compliance program to meet the requirements of USEPA. This effort involved: developing new and technically superior sampling methods and obtaining approval from the Environmental Protection Agency for their use; negotiating specific methodologies with the Environmental Protection Agency to implement certain requirements of the regulation: implementing a complete, quality assured, compliance program; and upgrading sampling systems. After several years of effort, Los Alamos National Laboratory now meets all requirements of the USEPA.

Description:
At the request of South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) and the Department of Energy (DOE), the Savannah River Laboratory was assigned the task of developing the release guides to protect aquatic biota. A review of aquatic radioecology literature by two leading experts in the field of radioecology concludes that exposure of aquatic biota at one rad per day or less will not produce detectable deleterious effects on aquatic organisms. On the basis of this report, DOE recommends the use of one rad per day as an interim dose standard to protect aquatic biota.

Description:
At the start of this D&D project, the decontamination goals were set at (1) reducing the stack emissions to 10% of the 1991 emissions; (2) reducing the exposure rate in each cell to < 1 mR/h; and (3) reducing the removable contamination to none detectable. Since the contamination can be fixed with paint, the other two goals were given priority. The estimate of the 1995 emissions from K-3 was 20% of the 1991 emissions estimate. However, the 1996 estimates are {approximately}9% of the 1991 emissions estimate. Since in 1991 the K-3 emissions were only 1/2% of the emissions from M-1, even the 20% reduction has little effect on the project reduction. The total emissions have been reduce to {approximately}2 1/4% of the 1991 emissions from the 5 hot cells that were decontaminated. The emissions and exposure rates are presented in Table I below. Cells A-1 and M-1 exceed the exposure rate criteria. For the other cells, the general exposure rate in the middle of the cell meets the criteria. However, near the prefilters, the exposure rates increase. Cell M-1 has extensive floor contamination that penetrated to a 6 inch depth. At 30 cm above the floor, the exposure rate through the lead blanket is 50 mR/h. A more detailed list of acceptance criteria were specified before the final verification survey. Table ii compares the maximum survey results on the wall or floor surface of each cell to these criteria. Cells M-1 and A-1 frequently fail to meet these criteria.

Description:
The results of the radiological and nonradiological environmental monitoring programs for 2003 at the Naval Reactors Facility are presented in this report. The results obtained from the environmental monitoring programs verify that releases to the environment from operations at NRF were in accordance with Federal and State regulations. Evaluation of the environmental data confirms that the operation of NRF continues to have no adverse effect on the quality of the environment or the health and safety of the general public. Furthermore, a conservative assessment of radiation exposure to the general public as a result of NRF operations demonstrated that the dose received by any member of the public was well below the most restrictive dose limits prescribed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy.

Description:
The Hanford Reach National Monument (HRNM) was created by presidential proclamation in 2000. It is located along the Columbia River in south central Washington and consists of five distinct units. The McGee Ranch-Riverlands and the North Slope units are addressed in this report. North Slope refers to two of the HRNM units: the Saddle Mountain Unit and the Wahluke Slope Unit. The Saddle Mountain and Wahluke Slope Units are located north of the Columbia River, while the McGee Ranch-Riverlands Unit is located south of the Columbia River and north and west of Washington State Highway 24. To fulfill internal U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements prior to any radiological clearance of land, the DOE must evaluate the potential for residual radioactive contamination on this land and determine compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5400.5. Authorized limits for residual radioactive contamination were developed based on the DOE annual exposure limit to the public (100 mrem) using future potential land-use scenarios. The DOE Office of Environmental Management approved these authorized limits on March 1, 2004. Historical soil monitoring conducted on and around the HRNM indicated soil concentrations of radionuclides were well below the authorized limits (Fritz et al. 2003). However, the historical sampling was done at a limited number of sampling locations. Therefore, additional soil sampling was conducted to determine if the concentrations of radionuclides in soil on the McGee Ranch-Riverlands and North Slope units were below the authorized limits. Sixty-seven soil samples were collected from the McGee Ranch-Riverlands and North Slope units. A software package (Visual Sample Plan) was used to plan the collection to assure an adequate number of samples were collected. The number of samples necessary to decide with a high level of confidence (99%) that the soil concentrations of radionuclides on the North Slope and McGee Ranch-Riverlands ...

Description:
The Department of Energy's (DOE) occupational radiation protection dose limits are specified in 10 CFR 835 (hereafter referred to as 'regulation'). Ambiguity in the regulation regarding designation of dose and fluence-to-dose conversion factors leads to confusion and disagreement regarding the appropriate choice of conversion factors. Three primary dose quantities of relevance are absorbed dose, D, quality factor, Q, and the product of those, called dose equivalent, H. The modifier Q is intended to express the long-term fatal cancer causing potential of different radiation types and generally increases with energy for neutrons. For photons, Q is close to unity regardless of energy. In principle, H could be estimated by incorporating a phantom and relevant Q values in a radiation-transport model. In practice, this would entail too much model complexity and computer time. The evaluator of H instead relies on pre-calculated energy-dependent fluence-to-dose conversion factors. Three primary sets of fluence-to-dose conversion factors are commonly used to determine stochastic dose for neutrons and photons: (1) ANSI/ANS-6.1.1-1977 that incorporates the NCRP-38 data for neutrons and sets based on Claiborne and Wells for photons, (2) ANSI/ANS -6.1.1-1991 that are based on and nearly identical to the neutron and photon sets in ICRP -51, and (3) neutron and photon sets in ICRP-74. The first set is maximum H values in a 30-cm diameter cylinder phantom for neutrons and in a 30-cm thick slab phantom for photons. The second set is effective dose equivalent, HE, derived from an anthropomorphic phantom by summing the products of tissue dose equivalents, HT, and tissue weighting factors, w{sub T}. The third set is effective dose, E, also derived from an anthropomorphic phantom by summing the products of H{sub T} and w{sub T}. E is functionally identical to H{sub E} except H{sub T} is the product of D and the radiation weighting ...

Description:
In response to a request from Solid Waste Management (SWM), this study evaluates the performance of waste disposed in Slit Trenches 1-5 by calculating exposure doses and concentrations. As of 8/19/2010, Slit Trenches 1-5 have been filled and are closed to future waste disposal in support of an ARRA-funded interim operational cover project. Slit Trenches 6 and 7 are currently in operation and are not addressed within this analysis. Their current inventory limits are based on the 2008 SA and are not being impacted by this study. This analysis considers the location and the timing of waste disposal in Slit Trenches 1-5 throughout their operational life. In addition, the following improvements to the modeling approach have been incorporated into this analysis: (1) Final waste inventories from WITS are used for the base case analysis where variance in the reported final disposal inventories is addressed through a sensitivity analysis; (2) Updated K{sub d} values are used; (3) Area percentages of non-crushable containers are used in the analysis to determine expected infiltration flows for cases that consider collapse of these containers; (4) An updated representation of ETF carbon column vessels disposed in SLIT3-Unit F is used. Preliminary analyses indicated a problem meeting the groundwater beta-gamma dose limit because of high H-3 and I-129 release from the ETF vessels. The updated model uses results from a recent structural analysis of the ETF vessels indicating that water does not penetrate the vessels for about 130 years and that the vessels remain structurally intact throughout the 1130-year period of assessment; and (5) Operational covers are included with revised installation dates and sets of Slit Trenches that have a common cover. With the exception of the modeling enhancements noted above, the analysis follows the same methodology used in the 2008 PA (WSRC, 2008) and the 2008 ...

Description:
Various laws stemming from the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 require air emissions modeling. Modeling is used to ensure that air emissions from new projects and from modifications to existing facilities do not exceed certain standards. For radionuclides, any new airborne release must be modeled to show that downwind receptors do not receive exposures exceeding the dose limits and to determine the requirements for emissions monitoring. For criteria and toxic pollutants, emissions usually must first exceed threshold values before modeling of downwind concentrations is required. This document was prepared to provide guidance for performing environmental compliance-driven air modeling of emissions from Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory facilities. This document assumes that the user has experience in air modeling and dose and risk assessment. It is not intended to be a "cookbook," nor should all recommendations herein be construed as requirements. However, there are certain procedures that are required by law, and these are pointed out. It is also important to understand that air emissions modeling is a constantly evolving process. This document should, therefore, be reviewed periodically and revised as needed. The document is divided into two parts. Part A is the protocol for radiological assessments, and Part B is for nonradiological assessments. This document is an update of and supersedes document INEEL/INT-98-00236, Rev. 0, INEEL Air Modeling Protocol. This updated document incorporates changes in some of the rules, procedures, and air modeling codes that have occurred since the protocol was first published in 1998.

Description:
ORISE conducted extensive scoping, characterization, and final status surveys of land areas and structures at the DNSC’s Hammond Depot located in Hammond, Indiana in multiple phases during 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Description:
Annual limits on intake (ALI) have historically been tabulated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (e.g., ICRP 1979, 1961) and also by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1988). These compilations have been rendered obsolete by more recent ICRP dosimetry methods, and, rather than provide new ALIs, the ICRP has opted instead to provide committed dose coefficients from which an ALI can be determined by a user for a specific set of conditions. The U.S. Department of Energy historically has referenced compilations of ALIs and has defined their method of calculation in its radiation protection regulation (10 CFDR 835), but has never provided a specific compilation. Under June 2007 amendments to 10 CFR 835, ALIs can be calculated by dividing an appropriate dose limit, either 5-rem (0.05 Sv) effective dose or 50 rem (0.5 Sv) equivalent dose to an individual organ or tissue, by an appropriate committed dose coefficient. When based on effective dose, the ALI is often referred to as a stochastic annual limit on intake (SALI), and when based on the individual organ or tissue equivalent limit, it has often been called a deterministic annual limit on intake (DALI).

Description:
Past practices at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) field facilities may have resulted in the presence of minute amounts of radioactive contamination in some hazardous wastes shipped from these facilities. In May 1991, the DOE Office of Waste Operations issued a nationwide moratorium on shipping potentially mixed waste from DOE facilities to commercial treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities. A potential waste-clearance strategy was developed to address the DOE mixed-waste moratorium issues, which had resulted from a lack of existing regulations regarding volume contamination. A radiological assessment model was developed on the basis of the detailed radiological assessment performed for eight commercial hazardous waste TSD facilities. The model incorporates waste- and site-specific data to estimate potential radiological doses to on-site workers and the off-site public from waste-handling operations at a TSD facility. The described waste-clearance strategy would provide both DOE and commercial TSD facilities with a rapid and cost-effective methodology for assessing potential human exposures from the processing of chemical wastes contaminated with trace amounts of radionuclides. This strategy also has important potential applications for establishing site clearance limits to ensure that worker and public risks would remain well below regulatory limits. The clearance strategy issues pertaining to current free-release practice, dose limits, data requirements, and conservatism are discussed.

Description:
This plan has been prepared in response to direction from the U.S. Department of Energy. The purpose of the plan is to define approaches that will be implemented to ensure protection of the public and the environment when active Low-Level Burial Grounds (LLBGs) at the Hanford Site are closed. Performance assessments for active burial grounds in the 200 East and West 200 Areas provide current estimates of potential environmental contamination and doses to the ''maximum exposed individual'' from burial ground operation and closure and compare dose estimates to performance objective dose limits for the facilities. This is an Operational Closure Plan. The intent of the guidance in DOE Order 435.1 is that this plan will be a living document, like the facility performance assessments, and will be revised periodically through the operational life of the LLBGs to reflect updated information on waste inventory. management practices, facility transition planning, schedule dates, assessments of post-closure performance, and environmental consequences. Out year dates identified in this plan are tentative. A Final Closure Plan will be prepared in the future when the timing and extent of closure-related activities for LLBGs can be established with greater certainty. After current operations at the LLBGs are concluded, this plan proposes transitioning of these facilities to the Environmental Restoration Program. This action will enable the Environmental Restoration Program to design and implement consistent and coordinated final remedial actions for active and inactive LLBGs. Active and inactive burial grounds in the 200 West and 200 East Areas are commingled. This plan describes approaches that will be implemented during Interim Closure, Final Closure, and Institutional Control Periods to prepare LLBGs for surface barriers, and the construction of barriers, as well as the scope of inspection, monitoring and maintenance practices that will be performed during and after closure. Environmental monitoring is ...

Filter: Decades

This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Decades listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.

Filter: Years

This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Years listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.

Having trouble finding an option within the list of Years? Start typing and we'll update the list to show only those items that match your needs.

Filter: Months

This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Months listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.

Filter: Days

This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Days listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.

Having trouble finding an option within the list of Days? Start typing and we'll update the list to show only those items that match your needs.